666 posts • joined Monday 4th June 2007 21:31 GMT
Re: What about CalTrain?
Caltrain is not particularly near Google, but running regular shuttles to the Mountain View campus would not be too hard. The bigger issue is getting to Caltrain if you don't already live near it. There's virtually nowhere to park at any SF Caltrain station, taking Muni to Caltrain is utterly unreliable, and even taking BART to Caltrain is not great, since, if you miss your train by three minutes, you may have an hour wait until another one comes along. On top of all these factors, Caltrain is not especially reliable and is already overcrowded during commute hours, and it's not clear that it's possible to increase the frequency of Caltrain due to the limited number of tracks and limited right-of-way down the peninsula. I'm not saying these factors can't be mitigated, but the issues with Caltrain are a key factor in the implementation of the employer shuttles.
Also, this is not just about Google. Genentech, VMware, Cisco, and a number of other companies run shuttles, and Caltrain doesn't necessarily go close to their campuses, nor are the public transit options amazing.
Re: A couple of root issues
To continue on the theme:
I agree that the buses are not making rents go up, but they are a contributing factor: if workers can be whisked to work by comfortable, air-conditioned, Wifi-equipped bus, the long commute becomes much less onerous, especially if one's employer counts transit time as work time.
I also agree that there are opportunities for people to live elsewhere in the Bay Area, but commuting from the Berkeley/Oakland area to the South Bay is even more hideous than commuting from SF proper, so East Bay development is not a panacea.
Finally, there are definitely artificial limits on growth in SF. First, there's a legal limit on how many square feet can be built in San Francisco in a given year. Second, there are soft limits on growth in the form of the aforementioned permit processes, etc. Also, San Francisco's sewer and power infrastructure need an overhaul to support increased population densities; without significant investment in these things, there's a very hard limit to additional construction, and it's precisely this kind of improvement which is opposed by "old school" San Franciscans. It's clearly possible to achieve that kind of density (see Hong Kong, Singapore, Manhattan), and it's the only way to keep prices from skyrocketing, but as mentioned above, there's significant opposition. Actually, there's one other way to reduce demand, which is to make San Francisco unliveable, which the army of homeless people is working on, facilitated by a lack of desire to anything substantial about that issue, even by so-called progressives, but I digress.
Excuse me if I don't send flowers.
A couple of root issues
The availability of corporate shuttles, of which the Google bus is one of the most prominent is down to terrible public transit infrastructure, congested freeways, and ridiculous commute distances. To get from San Francisco to Mountain View by way of public transit, one has to use an infrequent and unreliable commuter rail system which is serviced by an unreliable bus/tram system or by BART, which is generally reliable, but whose connection with the rail system is so tight that even a two-minute disruption significantly delays commute times. Driving to any connection point is also pretty awful, and driving to Mountain View is thoroughly wretched. While the ideal solution would be to improve public transit infrastructure by means of taxing the big corporate employers, I'm sure the big corporate employers have managed to avoid most taxation, and the public transit agencies themselves are often woefully mismanaged, leading to the current unsatisfactory situation.
On the other side of the coin, people like living in San Francisco because it has amenities like restaurants, museums, bars, and nightlife, unlike the South Bay/Peninsula, which is largely a godawful expanse of bland suburbia, so there's not much appeal for the young, affluent tech worker. Unfortunately, San Francisco is so awash in NIMBYs that actually getting new housing or infrastructure put in to offset the growth in demand is a nightmarish process of permitting and hearings which usually takes several years to resolve and which can easily be blocked by anyone who cares to raise a ruckus. The result is huge demand for an artificially-limited housing supply, leading to gross price inflation. It's also worth noting that the entirety of San Francisco fits inside seven square miles, so the available space to build upon is much more limited than many other urban environments.
The solutions are clear: build more housing, improve public transit, and have people live closer to their jobs, all of which would yield benefits to the public at large, not just employees of the big corporations. Unfortunately, those solutions are so challenging that the short-term symptoms are pretty much inescapable. Equally unfortunately, I have yet to hear a grown-up debate about the underlying issues, just name-calling and hand-wringing. Until there's a meeting of the minds between Bay Area politicians and the corporate executives of Google and the other big tech companies, no real solution is likely to be forthcoming.
The BOFH knows about bad passwords
Re: To boldly go......
Hmm, if only you had access to some global network of public human knowledge that you could search. Ah well, failing that, try this link:
Mechanical vs. SSD
And significantly more expensive. If you need (or want) bulk storage, spinning rust is still the way to go.
Excellent rant, Trevor. There's one very welcome addition to the storage arena that the new vendors seem to be bringing as well, and it has to do with the answer to the question "How can you tell when a storage vendor is lying to you?" Even more recent startups like Nimble and Violin seemed to be following the old guard that way, but my dealings with some of the companies on your list have been refreshingly honest and forthright.
Correction . . .
But the kind of portable heads-up display, usable by the general public and embodied by Google Glass, seems to have been beyond the imagination of authors, which makes it either truly innovative or a really stupid idea.
David Brin included technology very like Google Glass in Earth and at least one short story . . . back in the 1990s. He, in fact, included them as a key component of a universal surveillance society in which any sort of anti-social behavior was immediately recorded and reported by little old ladies wearing the glasses. Initially, of course, Google Glasses and whatever imitators will be worn by the technorati, but I think it's not a far leap to see them becoming commodity eyewear and thus used to enforce social norms.
Re: Netscape won the browser war
Quite right, old chap! Why, looking at my work PCs, I can't say that I have more than a few dozen discrete applications installed on each of them, and a few dozen more besides on my home system. What's 100+ applications installed across three PCs between friends? Everything is Web apps! Everything!
The reason for the late announcement is simple enough: about 90% of the potential technical attendees were off in the Black Rock Desert, so there was no reason to release anything but marketing fluff at VMworld.
Re: the numpty with the SIM tattoo?
"Could the Reg not find someone with a clue to right about these things???"
I'm in your post, destroying your credibility.
For hunting armored zombies. Or Terminators.
Re: Anyone responsible for Lotus Notes...
What did HP do to deserve that? Meg Whitman hasn't eaten any babies that I know of.
Re: Am I the only one
All together now, one more time: Glasses do not make an "AR view". They do not fully superimpose over your entire vision. You get a screen in the upper-right portion of your visual field, where the display device sits. It is not physically capable of changing the things you see around you; it could only display a modified version in one small portion of your vision.
This is true now, but it may not always be so.
Re: Smart RAID?
I believe that Seagate do have a patent on this technology, in fact, based on my discussions with a former subsidiary of theirs which makes a product that uses a version of it. I could be wrong, though.
I have not worn a watch in years because it's one more damn thing I have to keep track of. Having my timepiece on my phone makes a lot more sense to me than having a separate device, especially when I have to check the time so seldom. It strikes me, in fact, that the people who do have watches are just as likely to have been "perverted by consumerism" because the watch often fulfills one or both categories of being a status symbol or a gadget.
Re: He's right but ...
Way to miss the fucking point, you fucking imbecilic gobshite. Why don't you take your fucking cluelessness to some other forum where people want to read your oblivious bullshit?
(Let's see how hard I can press the Reg moderators here.)
"Cue," not "queue."
"Ignore the app ecosystem and all you've got is a big Start Menu, that's the whole difference."
Wrong. The lack a Start button is actually the least of the problems with the new Start screen. It's simple enough to mouse down to the lower-left corner and click, true enough, and that's what most experienced users will probably do by default. The mainproblems with the Start screen are:
1) It is non-hierarchical; i.e., everything in creation gets splattered all over the screen. When an application installs multiple shortcuts, it's nice to have them associated with that application, not put on the top level by default.
2) It is unsorted and unsortable. I find it logical to sort things in some kind of order, say alphabetically, automatically, without having to shuffle everything around by hand.
3) It is hideous. This is, of course, a subjective viewpoint, but the default available color schemes are wretchedly ugly.
Now, to address the inevitable counter-points:
1) Yes, I know you can re-arrange icons by hand. That's fine when you have only a few applications, but I have dozens of applications with probably over a hundred icons among them. Some sort of default order is called for.
2) I don't care whether my complaints seem like minor objections to you. They constitute a non-trivial impediment to the optimal setup of my primary workspace.
3) I also know that you can install programs to return the Start menu to its pre-Win8 configuration. The availability of those programs does not negate the criticism of the Windows 8 Start screen; if anything, they support the criticism because they indicate that there is a significant market for the return of the old configuration.
"I wish everyone would get over the start screen."
I wish I could ride to work on a unicorn, but that's not going to happen either.
Winklevossen, surely; Winklevii would be the plural of Winklevius.
Right, I'm going . . .
"Time is an illusion, lunch time doubly so." -- Slartibartfast
Clearly, this is primitive work on bistromathics and/or a Somebody Else's Problem Field.
@Vladimir Re: Oh, Amazon
I suggest you go back and think about life and the universe and contemplate the idea that convenience is not an acceptable trade-off for quality.
On that basis, you obviously would never listen to recorded music at all, because the only true way to experience music is live, and if you're not willing to go see an artist live, then you obviously don't appreciate their music, so you shouldn't listen to it at all.
Back in the real world, people often do sacrifice convenience for quality, hence the rise of things like portable media devices, camera phones, fast food, etc. What may come as a surprise to you is that using these devices does not immediately make someone an idiot; it just means that convenience has value to them.
Re: Of course, things could be so much simpler
And what if you log in from a different device or browser?
Re: How sexist
The other Reg article you posted makes no mention of the same group even being aware of the male beheading video, just that they were complaining about the double standard that it's okay to display graphic (or even "joke") violence towards women but that it's not okay to post, for example, pictures of breastfeeding or certain art. I saw nothing in the previous article indicating that the group was condoning displays of violence towards men, merely that they were choosing to focus on the female violence issue.
If you don't understand why the issue of violence against women is worth focusing on, specifically, then the ignorance, I'm afraid, is yours.
I'm not going to debate the merits of feminism, its relevance, or the issue of violence towards women in the context of society on an IT forum (although I reserve the right to change my mind), so I'm going to set everything else aside.
Re: How sexist
This just in: there are groups and organizations which are oriented towards reducing hate and violence against specific segments of society. The reason is twofold: that there is so much hate in the world that simply promoting a message of opposing hatred and violence in general has not traditionally been successful, and people tend to look after their own self-interest.
To my mind, any cause which seeks to reduce violence should be applauded. If you are oh-so-concerned about hate speech against men, why don't you do something about it besides complaining on an Internet forum? Why don't you join or form an organization devoted to reducing hate against men or humans in general?
I won't hold my breath. In the meantime, take your concern trolling elsewhere.
Re: Redirect "Arts" funding to science!
I completely agree with you, except change "arts" to "military" and "public art projects" to "war." Along the way, science can pick up several orders of magnitude more funding as opposed to the utter pittance supplied to the arts.
Re: Bitcoin? Definitely not Mochizuki
Mochizuki? Is that you?
Re: Slow news day...?
*Looks up*. Yes, it's in Bootnotes, all right. Who pissed in your Wheaties this morning?
Re: Why hybrid arrays vs. all flash arrays?
Despite the work being done by the all-flash array vendors, it's still cheaper in some cases to keep cold data or sequential workloads on spinning rust.
You have to say his name *three* times!
Re: I'm just too old
Call in the airstrike.
Re: Yay, Israel thread!
Oh good, thanks for proving my point.
Yay, Israel thread!
I, for one, await the torrent of reasonable, thoughtful, and moderate posts which will no doubt ensue.
Darth Vader is actually Luke's father
Rosebud was a sled
Snape kills Dumbledore
Bruce Willis is actually dead
The hot girl is actually a man
The protagonist is Tyler Durden
Maggie shot Mr. Burns
Gir was the turkey all along
Re: lies, damn lies and ...
I don't think you understand what the word "meaningless" means. The ratio of CEO pay to the pay of the average worker in a given company is obviously different from the comparison to average worker pay in general, but it can certainly be argued that the ratio within a company is a useful metric of pay distribution.
Re: De Ja Vu?
@Tom 35: This is essentially the current model, anyway. Most US cab drivers rent taxi medallions from cab companies, meaning that the drivers owe a flat rate per month. At least Uber only takes a cut of the actual fare!
If you had RTFA, you would realize that Uber is a US-based company, where the market is decidedly unsaturated. Also, Uber is not just a cab-hailing service, it's actually a car service. The name used to be UberCab, but the company changed the name so as not to fall foul of the ridiculously stringent taxi laws in US.
Re: Impartial Opinion
Excellent Eadon impression, with the exception of not posting "MICROSOFT FAIL" at the end.
Opera UI trade secrets
After the Mozilla team stopped laughing, I'm sure they thanked Hansen for advising them what not to do.
I know, right? Kids today, with their terrible music, appalling taste in clothing, disrespect for their elders, etc. Back in my day, we had universally fantastic music like 2 Live Crew, 'N Sync, Kylie Minogue, and all the other greats of the era. Truly, those days will never come again!
"I want more life, fucker." -- Steve Jobs
Re: Obviously a bad thing, but...
2) Also irrelevant. I have no idea whether the malware spreaders have done a cost-benefit analysis, but your point has to do with optimizing for maximum profitability rather than whether a net profit is being obtained. It may be that the bitcoin miners are not making the optimum profit for their labor, but that doesn't mean they're not profiting.
Re: So what prevents Google from load balancing to power budget???
If that question made the least amount of sense, perhaps someone could answer it.
- It's true, the START MENU is coming BACK to Windows 8, hiss sources
- iSPY: Apple Stores switch on iBeacon phone sniff spy system
- Chinese gamer plays on while BMW burns to the ground
- Pic NASA Mars tank Curiosity rolls on old WET PATCH, sighs, sniffs for life signs
- How UK air traffic control system was caught asleep on the job